Dynamic and adaptable system and method for selecting a user interface dialogue model

ABSTRACT

A communication system includes a selection module for selecting appropriate user interface types for nodes within a task. The selection module interacts with a selection criteria library and a user interface dialogue model library to determine an appropriate user interface. Selection criteria library and user interface dialogue model library may be selectively and dynamically adapted to reflect environmental, customer and organization changes.

TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates in general to communication systems andmore particularly to an adaptable system and method for selecting a userinterface dialogue model.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Customers contact organizations such as telecommunications companies inorder to accomplish tasks including ordering a service, requestingrepair service, or asking questions about their bill. When a customercontacts the organization, the customer's call is connected to a userinterface which may be a customer service representative or any of anumber of automated systems. Currently, when designing a system forcommunicating with customers, the determination of the type interface ordialogue model a customer will interact with is decided at an earlystage within the design of the communication system. Typically,designers choose a primary interface, such as a speech directed dialogueinterface, and a secondary or back-up interface, such as a touch toneinterface, in case the primary interface fails.

As a communication system changes over time, the existing dialogue modelis often ill suited for newly added tasks. However, the existingdialogue model is often maintained because redesigning the system toincorporate a new dialogue model is prohibitively expensive. This maylead to a decrease in the effectiveness of the system as well ascustomer dissatisfaction and frustration.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

A more complete understanding of the present embodiments and advantagesthereof may be acquired by referring to the following description takenin conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which like referencenumbers indicate like features, and wherein:

FIG. 1 is a depiction of a communication system including a selectionmodule, user interface dialogue module library and selection criterialibrary according to the teachings of the present invention;

FIG. 2 shows a flow diagram of a user interface selection systemaccording to the present invention; and

FIG. 3 is a flow diagram of a method for selecting user interfacedialogue models.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

Preferred embodiments and their advantages are best understood byreference to FIGS. 1 through 3, wherein like numbers are used toindicate like and corresponding parts.

Now, referring to FIG. 1, a communication system for communicating withcustomers, depicted generally at 10, is shown. Communication system 10is preferably designed to receive communications from customers or otherconstituents of an organization. In the present embodiment,communication system 10 is designed to receive incoming communicationsfrom telecommunications customers on behalf of a telecommunicationscompany.

Communication system 10 includes selection module 12 which is operablyconnected with both user interface dialogue model 14 and selectioncriteria library 16. Persona library 50 as well as a plurality ofcommunication task modules such as module A, 60 module B, 70 and moduleC, 80 are also operably connected with selection module 12.

In the present embodiment, selection module 12 operates to select anappropriate user interface for a particular node of a communicationtask. Selection module 12 includes criteria evaluation module 18,interface scoring module 20, interface selection module 22, personaevaluation module 24 and feedback module 25. Selection module 12 isgenerally operable to communicate with selection criteria library 16 anduser interface dialogue model library 14. User interface dialogue modellibrary 14 is a database or other information storage means for storinginformation about a plurality of different user interface dialoguemodels 30 which may also be referred to as user interfaces or dialoguemodels. User interface dialogue model library 14 includes criteriascores 38 for each user interface type.

In the present embodiment, user interface dialogue model library 14includes four user interface types: service representative 31, touchtone IVR 32, speech directed dialogue 34, and speech statisticallanguage model/natural language understanding (SLM/NLU) 36. In thepresent embodiment, criteria scores 38 are listed for each individualuser interface type and are also associated with a criteria number 39.Each criteria number 39 corresponds to a criteria 40 listed withinselection criteria library 16.

Selection criteria library 16 is a database or other information storagemeans for storing information related to selection criteria forselecting a user interface type. Selection criteria library 16 includesa listing of a plurality of criteria 40 and associated criteria weightscores 42. Criteria 40 may include, for example, criteria such as cost,customer satisfaction, automation rate, task completion rate, taskcomplexity, confidence of outcome, length of time in system, listlength, interface used in previous state, and a dialogue state counter.These example criteria 40 are described in greater detail with respectto FIG. 2, below. Criteria weight 42 is an assigned valuation of theimportance or weight given to each particular criteria 40. In thepresent embodiment, criteria weight 42 is dynamic and adaptable.Criteria weight 42 may be adapted, modified or changed to reflectchanging environmental factors, changing customer factors, and changingorganizational factors.

As an example, environmental factors may include background noise andcell phone (modality) use. High background noise may shift the VUIselection to one that operates better in high noise. Cell phone mayshift the VUI selection to one that does not require keying informationmanually, but rather utilizes voice commands. Examples of customerfactors include changing customer views and priorities generally andsystem-specific factors. General views and priorities may include, forinstance, customer views on cost and customer service which may begained from survey data or other similar data. System-specific triggerevents such as increasing the weight of the “time in system” criteria ifthe average time a customer spends in the system exceeds a pre-selectedaverage. An example of a changing organization factor may be that anorganization may periodically change its goals with respect to factorssuch as cost and automation rate. In these instances, the criteriaweights may be changed to reflect changes in an organization's goals orpriorities.

Selection module 12 operates to select a proper user interface type fromuser interface dialogue model library 14 for anyone of the plurality ofcommunication task modules 60, 70, or 80. Each communication task modulesuch as communication task module A 60 includes a number of steps ornodes 62 required to complete the task. Each node may have associatedtherewith one or more variables 64. Variables 64 may be used to adjustthe value of criteria weight 42 or criteria score 39 to reflectnode-specific factors. One example of a node-specific factor that isused to adjust criteria weight 42 is list length. An example of wherevariable 64 may be used to adjust a criteria score is with respect tothe time in system score related to a service representative 31 form ofuser interface because the time in system for such an interface will bedirectly affected by whether or not a customer service representative isavailable or whether the customer will be put on hold.

In operation, selection module 12 evaluates which user interface type 30to use a particular communication task such as communication task moduleA 60. Selection module 12 first evaluates which user interface type 30to use for the first node 62 or step within communication task module A60. After successful completion of each node 62, selection module 12evaluates and selects a user interface type for each successive node 62within the communication task module. Criteria evaluation module 18begins this process by retrieving criteria 40 and their associatedcriteria weights 42 from selection criteria library 16. Interfacescoring module 20 then retrieves criteria scores 38 for each of theplurality of listed user interface dialogue models 30. Interface scoremodule 20 then, for each user interface dialogue model 30, multiplieseach criteria score 38 with each corresponding criteria weight 42 andadds the resulting values to determine an interface score. Interfaceselection module 22 then selects the user interface dialogue model thathas the highest interface score. The communication node is then directedto the selected user interface dialogue model and proceeds until thecompletion of the current node of the communication task.

In some embodiments, interface scoring module 20 may incorporate one ormore values such as variable value 65 associated with a node, such asnode 66. Variable value 65 may then be factored into a criteria weightvalue 42 or a criteria score value 39. For example, interface scoringmodule 20 may multiply selected criteria weight 67 by variable 65. Bymultiplying the variable value with criteria weight 67, interfaceselection module 22 adjusts the criteria weight for node specificvariables. As another example, interface scoring module 20 mayincorporate variable value 69 as the criteria score for servicerepresentative 30 user interface type dialogue model. In this particularinstance, variable 69 is a factor that represents the average time(using a moving average) in system for a call routed to a servicerepresentative. Accordingly, when there are not enough servicerepresentatives to handle incoming calls, and customers must be put onhold before they can speak to a customer service representative, thismay be factored into the criteria score.

After selection module 12 selects a user interface type, personaevaluation module 24 may evaluate whether the selected user interfacedialogue is appropriate for the particular call based on call-specificaspects known as persona. In particular, persona evaluation module 24may be used to evaluate whether or not a specific call is appropriatefor user interface types that include a voice recognition component suchas a speech directed dialogue 34 or SLM/NLU 36. Persona library 50contains call specific data, including data related to the caller'schoice of words, the caller's pitch, modulation, and attitude. Ifpersona evaluation module 24 determines that the selected user interfacetype is not appropriate for a particular call then persona evaluationmodule communicates with interface selection module 22 to select theuser interface type with the next highest interface score. The processof persona evaluation 24 may then be repeated for the second selecteduser interface type.

Selection module 12 also includes feedback module 25. Feedback module 25automatically provides feedback to the variables 64 associated with thecommunication task module 60, criteria weights 42, and criteria scores38. For example, feedback module 25 operates to and keep track of thesuccess rate and time lengths associated with the plurality of userinterface types. Feedback module 25 may automatically adjust criteriaweights 42, communication task variables 64 and criteria scores 38 toreflect the current state of the communication system 10. Feedbackmodule 25 also allows a system administrator to manually adjust thecriteria weight 42 and criteria scores 39 to reflect changingenvironmental factors, customer factors, and organizational factors.

For example, if the customer begins with a very broad topic, the speechSLM/NLU 36 style of “How May I help You/Speak Freely” would be utilized.However, if the environment has a lot of background noise, the TouchTone 32 style would be utilized through operation of persona evaluationmodule 24. As the customer continues their interaction, the dialoguemodel could change from Speech Directed Dialogue 34 to a ServiceRepresentative 31. An important aspect of this invention is that thedialogue models may change dynamically as the behavior and goals of thecustomer becomes more evident, the task evolves, and the environmentalsituation changes.

This invention also allows for the dynamic update of the content of eachdialogue model 30, based on user behavior and system performance. Forexample, a speech directed dialogue model 34 may be very effective forbilling tasks, but is not effective for repair tasks. In this case,touch tone model 32 may be adapted to be more likely to be selected fornodes related to repair tasks and to include repair options in a moreprominent location within the interface. This functionality helps ensurethat each interface type is customer-centric.

Now referring to FIG. 2, a flow diagram of a communication system forselecting a user interface, depicted generally at 100, is shown. Inoperation, a particular node or dialogue state is begun withincommunication system 100 at 110. When the node is begun 112, criteriaevaluation module 114 first considers criteria 132 stored withincriteria library 130. Criteria 132, in the present embodiment, includescost 134, customer satisfaction 136, automation rate 138, taskcompletion rate 140, task complexity 142, confidence of outcome 144,time in system 146, list of length 148, VUI for previous state 150 anddialogue state counter 152. In an alternative embodiment, additionalcriteria may be listed within criteria library 130 and some of thecriteria listed in the present embodiment may not be included.

Criteria library also includes a criteria weight 154 corresponding toeach criteria 132. Criteria weight 154 reflects the relative weight orimportance placed on each particular criteria. For instance, if anorganization is attempting to keep costs low, the criteria weight 154for the criteria of cost 134 would be set at a relative high valuation.In some embodiments, criteria weight 154 may be set at 0 for variouscriteria 132 effectively eliminating those criteria from consideration.

Cost 134 is a reflection of the cost of a particular interface type. Forexample, a service representative 168 is typically the most expensiveform of user interface while a touch tone interface 166 is typically theleast expensive form of user interface.

Customer satisfaction 136 is an indication of the degree to whichcallers, customers, or constituents are satisfied with the particularuser interface. Automation rate 138 is an indication of the rate atwhich user interface selection is more for automated systems (such as atouch tone or directed dialogue system) versus non-automated systems(such as a service representative). Task completion rate 140 is the rateof successful completion of tasks by a particular user interface type.In a particular embodiment task completion rate 140 may be specific tothe successful task completion rate of a particular user interface typeto a particular node or a particular communication task module (as shownin FIG. 1).

Confidence of outcome 144 is an indication of the likelihood that aparticular node will be successfully completed. Time in system 146 is areflection of the average time a user interface type takes to complete aparticular node. List length 148 is a node specific characteristicreflective of the number of list options associated with a particularnode. Interface from previous state 150 is an indication of the userinterface type that was used by the previous node. Dialogue statecounter 152 is a counter to keep track of the number of times a user hasused a particular dialogue state for a particular node. The dialoguestate counter is intended to indicate when a user continues to fail tocomplete a task after several attempts using a particular user interfacetype.

The use of tasks broken down into nodes as well as dialogue statecounter 152 helps the customer from “going backward” in the interaction.“Going backward” occurs when the interface style does not change and thecustomer fails in accomplishing their task with a particular style (forwhatever reason), and the customer may have to repeat information. Inother words, the customer may be asked to re-enter information that theypreviously provided. With this invention, the library provides adialogue model knowing the current state of information.

Criteria evaluation module 114 retrieves the criteria 132 andcorresponding weights 154 as described with respect to criteriavaluation module 18 shown in FIG. 1. Next, user interface scoring module116 interacts with user interface library 160. User interface library160 includes criteria weight information for a plurality of userinterface types. In the present embodiment the user interface typesinclude statistical language model 162, directed dialogue model 164,touch tone model 166, and service representative 168. In an alternativeembodiment, additional user interface types may be included and lessthan all the current user interface types may be included. The presentinvention encompasses web-based and wireless web-based user interfacetypes.

Criteria scores 170 are particular to each user interface type and acriteria score corresponding to each criteria 132 listed within criterialibrary 130 is preferably maintained. Criteria scores 170 are preferablya relative reflection of the strength of each particular interface typewith respect to each criteria 132. For example, with respect to cost134, statistical language module 162 will have a lower criteria scorethan directed dialogue module 164 because a statistical language modeltype interface 162 is typically more expensive than directed dialoguetype interface 164. However, touch tone type interface 166 will have ahigher criteria score than a directed dialogue interface and a servicerepresentative type interface 168 will have a lower criteria score 170than a statistical language model 162 type user interface.

User interface scoring module 116 retrieves criteria score information170 from user interface library 160 similar to the operation ofinterface scoring module 20 as described with respect to FIG. 1. Userinterface scoring module 116 calculates a user interface score bymultiplying criteria weight 154 by criteria score 170 for each criteria132 and for each of the plurality of user interfaces. The resulting sumof all of the criteria weights multiplied by their correspondingcriteria scores 170 is equal to the interface score for each particularuser interface type. User interface scoring module 116 then selects theuser interface type with the highest interface score. In an alternativeembodiment such as the embodiment shown in FIG. 1, a separate model suchas the interface selection module 22 performs the selection of the userinterface type. In some embodiments, user interface scoring module 116may rank the user interface types according to their interface scores.

In the present embodiment, after user interface scoring module 116selects an appropriate user interface type, persona consideration module116 interfaces with persona library 180 to determine whether theselected user interface is appropriate for a particular call. Personalibrary 180 includes a number of call specific factors including age182, gender 184, choice of words 186, pitch 188, modulation 190, andattitude of 192. For each factor persona library 180 also includespersona score of 194. In an alternative embodiment, more or fewer callspecific factors may be included within persona library 180. In thepresent embodiment, persona consideration module 118 operates similarlyto persona evaluation module 24 as shown in FIG. 1 and is primarilydirected to considering the appropriateness of voice activated userinterface types.

After the persona consideration module approves of the interfaceselection, the node is advanced to allow interaction with user 120. Ifthe node is successfully completed, the method is repeated for the nextnode. If the node is not successfully completed 124, criteria evaluationmodule 114 reconsiders the criteria 132 contained within criterialibrary 130 for the particular node 112. In effect, the process isrepeated. In addition, information related to handling node 112 isincorporated into feedback module 128. Feedback module 128 interactswith user interface library 160 to adjust criteria scores 170 and withcriteria library 130 to adjust criteria weights 154 appropriately.

Now referring to FIG. 3, a flow diagram showing a method for selectinguser interface dialogue nodes is shown. The method begins 200 bydetermining the appropriate criteria for the first node of a task 212.The criteria for the first node of the task are then scored 214 and adialogue module or interface type is selected to complete the first nodeof the task 216.

In some embodiments (not expressly shown), an additional step may beimplemented following selection step 216. This added step wouldpreferably gather feed back information pertaining to the results of thecustomer's experience with the first node. For example, if the customerfails to successfully complete the first node or if there is a highbackground noise, this information may be considered for the next step,218. This additional step my then be repeated after each subsequentselection step 222 and 228.

Next, a selection criteria for a second node of a particular task aredetermined 218. The selected criteria for the second node of the tasksare then weighed or scored 220 and an appropriate dialogue module isselected to complete the second node of the particular task 222. Thesesteps are then repeated for each ensuing node of a task such that forthe n^(th) node of a particular task the appropriate criteria aredetermined 224 and then scored or weighed 226 to determine and select anappropriate dialogue task 228.

The present invention advantageously allows the unique advantages ofparticular dialogue models matched with nodes to the customer's andorganization's advantage. The selection of which dialogue model is adynamic and customizable approach that can be adapted over time based onthe priorities defined by the company, user behavior, and systemperformance.

Although the disclosed embodiments have been described in detail, itshould be understood that various changes, substitutions, andalterations can be made to the embodiments without departing from theirspirit and scope.

1. An adaptable user interface selection system comprising: a selection module operable to receive a request for a user interface dialogue model for a dialogue node within a communication action, the selection module having a criteria evaluation module and an interface scoring module; a selection criteria library including a plurality of selection criteria, each selection criteria having an associated criteria weight; a user interface library including a plurality of user interface dialogue models, each of the plurality of user interface dialogue models having a criteria score for each of the plurality of selection criteria; the criteria evaluation module operable to retrieve the plurality of selection criteria and the associated weights from the selection criteria library; the user interface scoring module operable to retrieve the associated criteria score from the user interface library and determine an interface score for each user interface dialogue model; and the selection module operable to select the user interface dialogue model having the highest interface score.
 2. An adaptable user interface selection system comprising: a selection module operable to receive a request for a user interface dialogue model for a dialogue node within a communication action; a selection criteria library including a plurality of selection criteria, each selection criteria having an associated criteria weight; a user interface library including a plurality of user interface dialogue models, each of the plurality of user interface dialogue models having a criteria score for each of the plurality of selection criteria; the selection module operable to communicate with the selection criteria library and the user interface library to calculate an interface score for each dialogue model and select a user interface dialogue model for the dialogue node.
 3. The selection system of claim 2 wherein the selection module further comprises: a criteria evaluation module operable to retrieve the plurality of selection criteria and the associated weights from the selection criteria library; a user interface scoring module operable to retrieve the associated criteria score from the user interface library and determine an interface score for each user interface dialogue model; and the selection module further operable to select the user interface dialogue model having the highest interface score.
 4. The selection system of claim 3 wherein the user interface scoring module determination of the interface score for each user interface dialogue model includes multiplying the associated criteria weight of each criteria with the associated criteria value.
 5. The selection system of claim 2 wherein the dialogue node further comprises at least one associated variable value for adjusting the interface score.
 6. The selection system of claim 5 further comprising the at least one associated variable value operable to adjust the criteria weight associated with at least one selection criteria.
 7. The selection system of claim 5 further comprising the at least one associated variable value operable to adjust at least one criteria score associated with at least one user interface dialogue model.
 8. The selection system of claim 2 wherein the selection criteria library includes at least two criteria selected from the group consisting of cost, customer satisfaction, automation rate, task completion rate, task complexity, confidence of outcome, time in system, list length, interface of previous node and dialogue state counter.
 9. The selection system of claim 2 wherein the user interface library includes at least two user interface dialogue module selected from the group consisting of speech statistical language model/natural language understanding, speech directed dialogue, touch tone Interactive Voice Response, and service representative.
 10. The selection system of claim 2 further comprising: a persona library including call specific factors; and a persona consideration module operable to evaluate the user interface dialogue module selection based upon the factors of the persona library.
 11. The selection system of claim 2 further comprising a feedback module operable to automatically adjust the criteria weights and the criteria scores.
 12. The selection system of claim 11 further comprising: the adjustment module operable to adjust the criteria weights and the criteria scores based upon at least one factor selected from the group consisting of environmental factors, customer factors, and organization factors.
 13. The selection system of claim 2 further comprising an adjustment module operable to allow selective adjustment of the criteria weights and criteria scores.
 14. An adaptable selection module embodied in a machine readable medium comprising: a criteria evaluation module operable to retrieve selection criteria and associated criteria weights from a selection criteria library; a user interface scoring module operable to retrieve criteria score information from a user interface library and determine an interface score for each of a plurality of user interface dialogue models; and a user interface dialogue selection module operable to select the user interface dialogue model having the highest interface score.
 15. The adaptable selection module of claim 14 further comprising a persona selection consideration module operable to evaluate the appropriate selected user interface dialogue model.
 16. The adaptable selection module of claim 15 further comprising the persona selection consideration module operable to evaluate each selection of a voice-activated type user interface dialogue model.
 17. The adaptable selection module of claim 14 further comprising a feedback module operable to automatically adjust the criteria weights and the criteria scores.
 18. A user interface dialogue model selection method comprising: receiving a node of a communication action; retrieving criteria and associated criteria weights from a criteria library; retrieving criteria scores for a plurality of user interface dialogue models; calculating an interface score for each of the plurality of user interface dialogue models; and selecting a user interface dialogue model based upon the interface scores.
 19. The method of claim 18 further comprising automatically updating the criteria weights in the criteria library based upon factors selected from the group consisting of environmental factors, customer factors, and organization factors.
 20. The method of claim 18 further comprising: receiving at least one variable value associated with the node; and incorporating the variable value into the interface score calculation of at least one of the plurality of user interface dialogue models. 